The term ‘channel’ occupies a strikingly heterogeneous position across the depth-psychology corpus, serving as a load-bearing metaphor in disciplines as distinct as neurophysiology, somatic therapy, trauma processing, and Vedantic psychology. In Kandel’s neuroscientific writing, the channel is first and foremost a literal membrane-spanning protein regulating ionic flow — the material substrate from which all mental functioning ultimately derives, whose pathological variants produce ‘channelopathies.’ This biological specificity stands in productive tension with the frankly metaphorical deployments found elsewhere. In Levine’s somatic-trauma framework, SIBAM deploys ‘channel’ to designate distinct experiential modalities (sensation, image, behavior, affect, meaning) whose integration or dissociation determines therapeutic outcome. Shapiro’s EMDR literature extends this sense further, treating channels as traversable pathways of dysfunctional information requiring sequential processing. Perhaps most philosophically ambitious is Easwaran’s Vedantic usage, in which channel describes the grooved neural-psychological structure carved by repeated samskara — a riverbed metaphor that bridges neurological conditioning and karmic patterning. Herman’s trauma work imports the television-channel metaphor to distinguish safe from activated memorial states under hypnosis. Craig’s interoceptive neuroscience uses channel to denote functional sensory pathways whose relative balance determines qualitative feeling-tone. Across these positions, the shared intuition is that psychological life flows through structured pathways — biological, somatic, informational, or karmic — whose formation, blockage, or redirection is the central concern of therapeutic and contemplative practice alike.